Home Office

Offences against Children

Jim Shannon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people accused of sexual offences involving children have been (a) investigated, (b) charged and (c) convicted in each of the last five years.

Karen Bradley: The Home Office does not centrally collect information on the number of people investigated by the police for offences recorded by the police. Additionally, the police recorded crime data that the Home Office does collect are based on the number of offences recorded, not the number of offenders.The Ministry of Justice hold data on the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty at all courts of sexual offences against children, in England and Wales. The available information, for 2010 to 2014, is given in the table



Defendants proceeded against
(Excel SpreadSheet, 28 KB)

Human Trafficking

Mr Chuka Umunna: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many victims of human trafficking were (a) identified and (b) offered support by her Department in each year since 2010; and if she will make a statement.

Karen Bradley: Potential victims of human trafficking are identified through the National Referral Mechanism (NRM). The number of potential victims referred into the NRM for the United Kingdom is: in 2010 – 714; in 2011 – 946; in 2012 – 1186; in 2013 – 1746; and in 2014 – 2340.The Salvation Army has provided support for potential victims in England and Wales since July 2011. The Salvation Army contract is jointly funded by the Home Office and The Ministry of Justice. The number of potential victims in support in England and Wales is: July 2011 to June 2012 – total in support 378; July 2012 to June 2013 – total in support 550; July 2013 to June 2014 – total in support 889. Data on the number of potential victims in support between July 2014 to June 2015 has not been verified yet.Data on the number of potential victims in support before July 2011 is not available. The Home Office does not hold data on the number of supported victims in Scotland and Northern Ireland, as this is a devolved matter.

Department for Culture Media and Sport

Department for Culture, Media and Sport: Press

Mr Mark Hendrick: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, which periodicals and newspapers his Department subscribes to; how many of each such periodical his Department acquires; and what the cost of subscribing to such periodicals was in 2014.

Mr Edward Vaizey: An error has been identified in the written answer given on 28 July 2015.The correct answer should have been:

The Department purchases the following newspapers each week: The Sun M-F x 3Financial Times M-F x 3Times M-F X 3Daily Telegraph Telegraph M-F X 4Independent M-F X 3Guardian M-F X 3Daily Mail M-F X 3Daily Express M-F X 3Daily Mirror M-F X 3Racing Post M-F X1Racing Post Saturday X 1Racing Post Sunday X 1Guardian Saturday X 1Financial Times Saturday X 1Independent-Saturday X 1Daily Mail Saturday X 1Daily Express Saturday X 1Sun Saturday X 1Times Saturday X 1Daily Mirror Sat X 1Daily Telegraph Saturday X 1Sunday Times X 1Sunday Telegraph X 1Independent on Sunday X 1Observer X 1Mail On Sunday X 1Sunday Express X 1Sunday Mirror X 1The Sun On Sunday X 1Spectator X 3New Statesman X 1Arts Review X 1The total amount spent on newspapers for Financial Year 2014-15 was £9659.16

Mr Edward Vaizey: The Department purchases the following newspapers each week: The Sun M-F x 3Financial Times M-F x 3Times M-F X 3Daily Telegraph Telegraph M-F X 4Independent M-F X 3Guardian M-F X 3Daily Mail M-F X 3Daily Express M-F X 3Daily Mirror M-F X 3Racing Post M-F X1Racing Post Saturday X 1Racing Post Sunday X 1Guardian Saturday X 1Financial Times Saturday X 1Independent-Saturday X 1Daily Mail Saturday X 1Daily Express Saturday X 1Sun Saturday X 1Times Saturday X 1Daily Mirror Sat X 1Daily Telegraph Saturday X 1Sunday Times X 1Sunday Telegraph X 1Independent on Sunday X 1Observer X 1Mail On Sunday X 1Sunday Express X 1Sunday Mirror X 1The Sun On Sunday X 1Spectator X 3New Statesman X 1Arts Review X 1The total amount spent on newspapers for Financial Year 2014-15 was £9659.16

HM Treasury

Monetary Policy

Ian Blackford: To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the effect of the quantitative easing programme on (a) bank lending generally and (b) M4 lending.

Harriett Baldwin: The UK’s monetary policy framework, set out in the Bank of England Act 1998, gives operational responsibility for monetary policy to the independent Monetary Policy Committee (MPC).   The MPC’s macroeconomic policy tools, including quantitative easing, are designed to affect the economy as a whole, in order to meet the 2 per cent inflation target over the medium term.   The Bank of England’s paper, “The United Kingdom’s quantitative easing policy: design, operation and impact”, published in 2011, notes that, “Asset purchases may also have a stimulatory impact…by influencing bank lending, though this channel would not be expected to be material during times of financial crisis.”

Ministry of Justice

Procurement

Mr Roger Godsiff: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what contracts his Department and HM Courts and Tribunals Service currently have out to tender.

Mr Roger Godsiff: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which contracts placed out to tender by (a) his Department and (b) HM Courts and Tribunals Service have been bid on by Synnex Concentrix.

Mr Shailesh Vara: PQ 56231. Professional Services, Evaluation of Sentencing Council Guidelines. 2. HMP Holloway Fire Safety Improvements. 3. Reducing Reoffending, Provision of three Risk assessments atHMP Swaleside, East Sutton Park and Stanford Hill. 4. Operational Goods, Supply of Portable Mobile Phone Detection Equipment. 5. Reducing Reoffending, Retender of Provision for 1 forensic psychology risk assessment atHMP Leyhill, 6. HMP Wandsworth Demolition of Laundry. 7. Reducing Reoffending, Provision of sixteen forensic psychology risk assessments at HMP Frankland. 8. Compliance and Enforcement Service, (Court Fines). 9. Transforming Youth Custody – Secure Training Centre. 10. Criminal Justice System – Efficiencies. 11. Professional Services – To implement a specialist financial services framework. PQ 5624 I can confirm that Synnex Concentrix has been announced as the preferred bidder for court enforcements. At this point, we are unable to disclose which suppliers have been involved in the other competitions listed above due to procurement competition rules and regulations.

Social Security Benefits: Appeals

Colleen Fletcher: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average length of time was for the Tribunals Service to administer a First-tier Tribunal-Social Security and Child Support appeal in respect of (a) personal independence payment, (b) employment and support allowance, (c) income support, (d) jobseeker's allowance and (e) tax credits in (i) Coventry, (ii) the West Midlands and (iii) England in the last period for which figures are available.

Mr Shailesh Vara: The First-tier Tribunal – Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) administered by HM Courts & Tribunals Service, hears appeals against Department for Work and Pensions’ decisions on a range of benefits. The table below shows the average length of time to administer appeals in respect of (a) personal independence payment (PIP), (b) employment and support allowance (ESA), (c) income support (IS), (d) jobseeker’s allowance (JSA) and (e) tax credits in (i) Coventry, (ii) the West Midlands and (iii) England between April 2014 and March 2015, the latest period for which figures are available. In 2014/15, due to falling receipts of new cases, the Tribunal Service began processing more older and more complex cases, hence the rise in the average length of time to administer appeals. Average length of time to administer appeals between April 2014 and March 2015 PIP1ESA2ISJSATax Credits3Coventry 17.939.933.328.317.6West Midlands 417.535.43725.817.3England 5 16.530.430.725.416.9  Notes:SSCS data are normally registered to the venue nearest to the appellant's home address. We cannot retrieve data based on the appellant’s actual address, but can produce reports detailing the numbers of cases that were dealt with at one of our Regional centres or heard at a specific venue.1. Personal Independence Payment (New Claim Appeals) which replaces Disability Living Allowance was introduced on 8 April 2013, also includes Personal Independence Claims (Reassessments)2. Includes Employment Support Allowance and Employment Support Allowance (Reassessments)3. Includes Working Family Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, Working Tax Credit.4. West Midlands includes the venues in: Birmingham, Coventry, Hereford, Stoke, Wolverhampton, Worcester, Shrewsbury, Kidderminster, Leamington Spa, Nuneaton and Walsall.5. Excludes SSCS Scotland processing centre and the following venues Aberystwyth, Bridgend, Cardiff, Caernafon, Carmarthen, Colwyn Bay, Cwmbran, Haverfordwest, Llandrindod Wells, Langstone, Llandudno, Llanelli, Llangefni, Llwynypia, Merthyr Tydfil, Neath, Port Talbot, Newtown, Pontypridd, Pontypool, Prestatyn, Swansea, Welshpool, Wrexham, Bargoed and Ebbw ValeAlthough care is taken when processing and analysing the data, the details are subject to inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale case management system and is the best data that is available.

Courts: Fees and Charges

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent representations he has received on the effect of the criminal courts charge.

Mr Shailesh Vara: This government believes that convicted adult offenders should pay towards the costs of running the criminal courts. Recovering some of these costs from convicted offenders will reduce the burden on taxpayers.  My department has received representations from the magistracy and defence practitioners about the criminal courts charge.  Only convicted offenders pay the criminal courts charge. This means that those who are found not guilty by the courts will not be required to pay the charge. We are confident that this mitigates against any adverse effects that may distort offenders’ decisions. The provisions are purely about recovering court costs and are completely separate from the offender’s sentence. It would therefore go against the principles of the legislation to allow judicial discretion regarding whether or not to impose the charge or the amount to impose.  The government recognises the need to make sure offenders are given a fair opportunity to pay the charge. The court is able to set payment terms in affordable instalments. Offenders can also contact a fines officer at any point to request variations in payment terms if their circumstances change. An offender can also apply to have the charge cancelled after two years where they take all reasonable steps to pay it and do not reoffend. It is for the court to decide whether all reasonable steps have been taken to pay the charge, having regard to the offender’s personal circumstances, such as unemployment or poor health.  The provisions include a requirement to review the policy after three years.

Open Prisons

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners currently in open prisons have previously (a) absconded or failed to return to prison and (b) breached the conditions of their temporary licence.

Mr Shailesh Vara: We have completely overhauled the processes for allowing prisoners out on temporary licence, leading to a 39% drop in the number of temporary release failures. This is the lowest failure rate since 2002, and the absconding rate has reached record lows under this and the Coalition government. The reduction in the numbers of absconds and ROTL failures demonstrate that the action that has been taken to improve assessment procedures in this area has been effective. We continue to look for improvements.  Since May 2014, prisoners with a history of escape, absconding or serious temporary release failure during the current sentence are already prevented from transfer to open conditions, other than in the most exceptional circumstances. There has been only one case satisfying those conditions since the policy was implemented. When the policy was implemented, it was not applied retrospectively. Prisoners already in open conditions were assessed by NOMS and any who were assessed as presenting an unacceptable risk in such conditions in light of their previous non-compliance were returned to closed prisons, with the remainder allowed to remain in open conditions because of their compliance with the regime and favourable risk assessment.  On 31 March 2015, there were 4,023 prisoners recorded as being in open prisons. Of these, 17 were recorded as having absconded between 1 April 2004 and 30 May 2014 when the policy change was came into force. There were no other cases of prisoners in this group absconding between 31 May 2014 and 31 March 2015.  Reliable electronic records for absconds and temporary release failures prior to 2004 are not available, therefore only incidents since 2004 could be considered. The data set used here includes prisons classified as having their predominant function to be open. These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Unpaid Fines

Andy Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the value was of fines remaining uncollected on 31 December (a) 2010, (b) 2011, (c) 2012, (d) 2013 and (e) 2014.

Mr Shailesh Vara: This Government takes recovery and enforcement of financial impositions very seriously and remains committed to finding new ways to ensure impositions are paid and to trace those who do not pay. This is why there has been a year on year increase in the total amount of financial penalties collected over the last four years. The amount of money collected at the end of 2013/14 was £290 million. The amount of money collected reached a record high of £310 million at the end of 2014/15 - an increase of £20m (7%) in cash collection of financial impositions (excluding confiscation) compared to that collected in 2013/14. The table below shows the total value of financial impositions outstanding in England and Wales at the end of each of the last five financial years. Year Total Value Outstanding regardless of Imposition date 2010/2011 £609,559,294 2011/2012 £593,268,197 2012/2013 £575,507,170 2013/2014 £548,811,011 2014/2015 £571,061,117 The total amounts outstanding can relate to impositions made in the year stated or any previous year. These figures include fines, compensation orders, victim surcharge orders and prosecution costs ordersThe outstanding balance figures includes the value of accounts that were not due to be paid by the end of the period specified (either because they were imposed close to the end of the year or because they had payment timescales set by the courts for beyond the end of the year) and those that were being paid by instalments on agreed payment plans. .

Repossession Orders

Mr Christopher Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average time taken is by bailiffs at Wandsworth County Court to execute possession orders; and if he will make it his policy to ensure that all applications made for the execution of county court possession orders by county court bailiffs are carried out within seven days of that application being made.

Mr Shailesh Vara: Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service holds provisional management information which shows that Wandsworth County Court take on average five weeks to execute a possession order following the issue of an enforcement application.The Ministry of Justice does not propose to implement time requirements for the execution of the possession order. It is necessary to deal with such applications on a case by case basis to meet the needs of both parties and to manage the safety of County Court Bailiffs.